미국 조직범죄법(RICO)에 대한 개관

The Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act: RICO(18 U.S.C.) has been expanded well beyond traditional organized crime to reach investigations involving violent crime, public corruption, complex fraud, and cyber crime, among other areas. Recently RICO used to combat non-traditional organized crime. First, 18 U.S.C. §1962(a) prohibits that investment of proceeds of pattern of racketeering activity, or collection of an unlawful debt in an enterprise affecting interstate commerce. 18 U.S.C. §1962(b) prohibits acquiring or maintaining an interest in an enterprise affecting interstate commerce, through a pattern of racketeering activity or collection of an unlawful debt. 18 U.S.C. §1962(b) prohibit conducting the affairs of an enterprise affecting interstate commerce through a pattern of racketeering activity or collection of an unlawful debt. 18 U.S.C. §1962(d) prohibits conspiring to commit a violation of any of the three substantive RICO offenses. In terms of definitions and elements for racketeering activity, enterprise can be legitimate entity, such as corporation, union, police department, law firm, governmental agency, and illegitimate association-in-facts, such as street gang, mafia, robbery crew. Enterprise must be engaged in, or its activities affect, interstate or foreign commerce, only a de minimus effect is required. Racketeering Activity must be a state or federal crime enumerated in the RICO statute and must show pattern of racketeering activity. Racketeering Act must be a state or federal crime enumerated in the RICO statute, and the government must prove all elements of racketeering Act by the proof of beyond reasonable doubt. Pattern of racketeering activity requires at least two racketeering acts within a period of 10 years. With respect to continuity, the government must show that the acts amount to continuing racketeering activity, or constitute the threat of ongoing racketeering activity. Predicate acts extending over a few weeks or months and threatening no future criminal conduct do not satisfy this requirement. The continuity means that RICO cases are geared toward long- term criminal conduct, not just sporadic or isolated criminal events. Relatedness is contrary to purpose of RICO, which was geared to combat diversified activities of organized crime. So, racketeering acts need not be similar to one another. To prove relatedness, acts have the same or similar purposes, results, participants, victims, or methods of commission or otherwise interrelated and not isolated events and are otherwise related to the affairs of the enterprise. In sum, racketeering activities involve two acts, relatedness, and continuity. Charging RICO conspiracy is joinder though substantive RICO may facilitate, co-conspirator statements admissibility, only proof of agreement that a co- conspirator would commit acts. It is not necessary to allege or prove for RICO conspiracy charge that defendant agreed to personally commit two racketeering acts. It is sufficient to allege and prove that he agreed to further an endeavor which if completed would satisfy all elements of substantive RICO charge and agreed that at least one member would commit at least two acts in furtherance of the enterprise’s affairs as straightforward as with a legal entity. The RICO imposes not only criminal penalties for violation of its provisions, but also civil remedies with allowing treble damages. RICO can be construed broadly, so it will allow alleging civil RICO claims in a wide range of commercial fraud actions. This RICO is a development and extension of criminal law and civil law in the subject of corruption and white collar crime, as well as fraud. Thus, studying and researching the characters of RICO will be able to come up with additional curatives to our legal area.